More on LinuxToday

Editor's Note: Does Linux Deliver For Small Businesses?

The answer is Yes, it does, though with some qualifications. The
short answer: it's all in the implementation. The long answer
starts with taking a look at Canonical's successes in opening new
doors for Linux deployments.

Canonical and Ubuntu have dominated the Linux news scene for
several months now, even more than they did before. They're
expanding in many directions:

Desktop editions: Xubuntu, Kubuntu, Edubuntu, Gobuntu

Ubuntu MID (Mobile Internet Device) Edition

Ubuntu Server

Ubuntu Studio

Tier 1 OEM desktop/notebook preinstalls (Dell, HP)

Tier 2 OEM netbook preinstalls (Acer, ASUS, other brands)

Plus all the community derivatives and Ubuntu-based projects.
Ubuntu is being re-packaged into all kinds of creative and useful
niche roles. Finally someone is doing what so many Linux fans have
been wanting for lo these many years: visibility, marketing, and
paving the way for Linux into areas where it had not received a
welcome before.

Before anyone starts complaining that I give Canonical too much
credit, let's be sure to acknowledge the tremendous work that
Canonical has built on, starting with Unix, Richard Stallman,
Intel, Linus Torvalds, and all the tens of thousands of developers,
distribution maintainers, bugfinders and fixers, artists,
documentation writers, LUGs, teachers and helpers who are all part
of the vast Linux and FOSS universe. It's a pretty special
place.

But Is It Good Enough?

I think some writers make a living recycling the "is Linux good
enough" question over and over, and never really coming to a
conclusion. The answer is Yes, with qualifications. Yes, Linux is
more than good enough to fill any number of roles: Web, mail, DNS,
print, file, database, user management, automated provisioning,
wireless services, security, routing, time server, cluster,
virtualizer, VoIP, terminal services, secure remote administration
and help desk, network monitoring, and so on. Yes, it is more than
good enough on the desktop: office productivity, music studio,
graphics and movie studio, accounting, groupware, games, home media
center, and so on.

So why isn't it catching on fast enough? Actually I think it is
catching on remarkably quickly given the tremendous obstacles:
inertia, deliberate and intensive interference from our favorite
convicted monopolist, lack of visibility, and lack of support. But
still, given the huge and unfixable deficiencies in Windows, and
the inflexibility and high price tag of Apple, and the non-stop FUD
and jackbooted thug business tactics, it seems that a secure,
low-cost/free/libre alternative that doesn't treat customers like
criminals should take off like wildfire.

The two most important bits are friendly, skilled, reliable
support, and visibility. Canonical have done a great job at raising
Linux's visibility. As for support, we can learn lessons from
successful businesses: the successful ones wrap up everything in a
nice tidy package, make it pretty, and do a lot of handholding. In
contrast, an all-too-typical Linux experience is "Here's a Linux
CD, now dump Windows and use Linux, and hit Google when you have
problems." That doesn't work. I've known Apple fans to do the same
thing-- they'll talk a friend or relative into dumping Windows for
a Mac, and then they think that's enough. But it's not because
there is still a learning curve, both in learning how to use the
machine, and learning what other software is available. It's a
whole different world.

Good Linux Support

Look at the story that ran yesterday, Microsoft
Slugs Aged Care Centres. I wonder how many serious proposals
they had ever received from Linux consultants? Or anyone not
affiliated with Microsoft? It takes a lot of time, knowledge, and
work to migrate away from a closed, proprietary platform, and to
keep the new system running well and in a way that serves the
customer's needs. It takes more people skills than technical
skills, because if they don't have confidence that they will be
well-taken care of those ace technical skills will never be called
on anyway.

In a way this sounds like the comment I criticized IBM for-- "We
sell solutions, not operating systems." And it is true that small
businesses want nice reliable packaged solutions. But it's also
true that operating systems are big differentiators, and it is
definitely worth marketing the differences. Let's see, the world's
most effective and most expensive malware vector that can barely
get out of its own way vs. efficient, reliable, stable, and
secure-able. Hmm, is there anyone who thinks such differences are
not worth mentioning?

So the medium answer is Yes, Linux combined with friendly,
skilled support definitely delivers for small business, and it does
so better than any other platform. Even if there are some
super-duper specialized Windows- or Mac-only applications that are
must-haves for a particular business, the sane infrastructure is
still Linux everywhere, Windows/Mac only as needed.